Oral Intervention made by Dr. Sein Win

Agenda Item: 9,

Worldview International Foundation
57th Session of UN Commission on Human Rights
Geneva.

Mr. Chairman,

I am Dr. Sein Win, an elected representative of the 1990 general elections from Paukkaung Constituency of Burma. I usually take this floor at each session of the UN Commission on Human Rights since 1991 to present the case of 1990 general elections in Burma with the hope that the commission could help accelerate the process of democratization which is vital for the improvement of overall human rights situation in my country. I fully agree with the concluding remark of former UN Human Rights Special Rapporteur, Judge Rajsoomer Lallah, who said, "The lack of respect to the rights pertaining to democratic governance is the root cause of various forms of human rights violations in Burma".

Indeed, a democratic state is a precondition for the exercise of human rights, and for a democracy to function it requires the consent of the people. Concepts such as inclusivity, participation, consensus, ownership, and sustainability are essential for the advancement of democracy. These concepts come together in the idea of dialogue as the foundation on which to promote democratic development.

Since the inception of the Burmese democracy movement, we have upheld dialogue as an integral part of the democratization process; both as an objective and an instrument at the same time. Consecutive UN resolutions affirm that the best means of promoting national reconciliation and the full and early restoration of democracy in Burma is through a Tripartite Dialogue between the democracy forces led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, true representatives of the non-Burman ethnic peoples, and the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) representing the military. Given the urgency to address the needs of the people, it is time for all political actors in Burma to put the interests of the people and the country above all other interests and seek a workable solution for the process of nation rebuilding.

In that sense, we welcome the talks between SPDC and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, which started in October 2000. We fully appreciate the efforts of the UN Special Envoy and all other countries, especially our neighbors to bring about such a significant breakthrough. We note with appreciation some positive steps taken by SPDC in releasing some political prisoners, the suspension of attacks on Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the leadership of the National League for Democracy (NLD) in the State-controlled media, and the implicit expression of tolerance through provision of space in some regions for the NLD to reorganize its township level organizing committees, the NLD Youth wing, and the reopening of offices.

The beginning of what we hope is a process of national reconciliation is indeed a rare opportunity for the people of Burma and we urge SPDC to take additional steps to build confidence in the current talks by further relaxing the restrictions placed on the people of Burma.

Though these positive developments are encouraging, human rights conditions nationally are still a concern for us. Even as talks are going on between Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the SPDC leaders, a situation that is totally incompatible with that atmosphere still prevails in the country. Thirty-four elected Members of Parliament remain in prison and 36 other MPs are being detained without trial in government guesthouses since 1996. Leaders of non-Burman ethnic nationalities who were arrested because of their support for the NLD and the establishment of the Committee Representing Peoples’ Parliament are still under detention, and more than one thousand political prisoners remain in Burmese prisons. Being exposed to harsh prison conditions, lack of medical care, and proper nutrition, serious health problems plague these political prisoners, particularly those in Thayet Prison. We strongly urge the SPDC authorities to release all political prisoners immediately and to avoid obstructing their right to freely participate in the political process according to the mandate given them by the people.

We are also seriously concerned about the ongoing military operations in the Shan, Karen and Karenni areas. In the course of the ongoing civil war, various forms of human rights violations are continuing unabated. People are being subjected to torture, rape, forced labor, arbitrary killings, extortion, and arbitrary seizure of their property and livestock. The systematic forced relocation of villages by the Burmese Army in Shan, Karen, and Karenni States has led to a massive displacement of people who have lost means of earning a living as well as the destruction of crops and livestock. Starvation, malnutrition, and death from contagious diseases are common among the one million internally displaced persons in non-Burman ethnic areas.

Another serious matter for concern is the lack of improvement in alleviating forced labor in Burma, particularly in areas where the Burmese army is deployed in strength. Quoting an analysis by the Federation of Trade Unions-Burma, ICFTU estimates that at least 80,000 individuals, men, women, children, and elderly persons from approximately 60 villages in four districts of Karen States were forced to perform hard labor between November 2000 and January 2001. The report on conscription for military porterage and forced labor for plantations owned by Army units came from Ye Township in Tenasserim Division, Southern tail of Burma.

As a gesture of demonstrating confidence in the current talks and with the aim of alleviating the suffering of the people, we strongly urge SPDC authorities to cease all hostilities, anti-religious activities, and human rights abuses, including forced relocations and forced labor. We propose creating "peace corridors" in areas of armed conflicts so that humanitarian assistance can be delivered directly without any political interference to those in most urgent need, especially in the non-Burma ethnic states.

Mr. Chairman:

Time is of the essence for the people of Burma and they need the good Offices of the UN Secretary-General and the UN Commission on Human Rights to help develop the current dialogue between Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and SPDC into an irreversible process towards a democratic transition. We appeal to the Commission to call on the SPDC to accept the visit of the newly appointed human rights Special Rapporteur for Burma and further cooperate with the UN Special Envoy.

Thank you.

Oral Intervention on Agenda Item 10
Catholic Institute for International Relations
Delivered by Ms. Khin Ohmar
57th Session of the UNCHR
Geneva, Switzerland

Mr. Chairman,

My name is Khin Ohmar and I am from Burma. For the past two years, I have talked before this session on the appalling human rights situation in my country. I welcome the ongoing talk between Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the military authorities. However, the overall human rights situation is still a grave concern. I would like to call upon the Commission to pay special attention, especially on the escalating use of forced labor.

The military authorities in Burma informed the ILO technical mission before its Governing Body Meeting in November 2000 that General Khin Nyunt, Secretary (1) of SPDC, had already issued a directive to all administrative and military units, which include the notion that the practice of forced labor is illegal and those who conscript forced labor will be prosecuted according to the law.

However, Mr. Chairman, this directive has never been announced by the State-run media. People are not well aware of this directive. In fact, the practice of forced labor has been continued throughout Burma, particularly in the Karen, Karenni and Shan States where the Burmese army is deployed in strength.

According to the Federation of Trade Unions of Burma, an estimate of at least 80,000 individuals, men, women and children and elderly persons from approximately 60 villages in four districts of Karen State were forced to perform hard labor during the period November 2000 to January 2001. There have been reports on conscription for military porterage and forced labor for plantations owned by army units in Ye Township in Tanassariam Division, the southern tail of Burma.

According to our sources, military confiscated lands without any compensation along a new gas pipeline construction from Thanbuzayat in Mon State to Myainggalae in Karen State. Many villages on pipeline route have been forcibly relocated. This pipeline will bring gas from Yetagon gas field for the consumption of cement factory in Myaingalae. We received information that forced labor is being used for the construction of that gas pipeline.

Mr. Chairman,

We are gravely concerned about the ongoing military operations in the Shan, Karen and Karenni States. In these areas, the SPDC has continued the systematic campaign of forced relocation. Massive internal displacement and, destruction of crops and live stocks by the Burmese army has made the livelihood of villagers impossible. Starvation, malnutrition and deaths from contagious diseases continue in these non-Burman ethnic areas, where international relief organizations and media are not accessible.

Since December 2000 the SPDC troops started dry season offensive in Shan, Karen and Karenni areas, and the use of forced porterage has elevated. For example, in Karen State from October to mid- December 2000, the army battalions of Division 22 demanded 10 villagers from each village in Shan-ywa-thit and Kulu Hta to carry supplies and ammunitions to Klaledi, about 20-mile distance. The villagers were ordered to serve as porters about 4 times a month. They had to carry loads weighing about 30 kilograms without being paid. At the end of November, a villager named Day Hkaw from Htee Ler Doh village stepped on a landmine and his leg was blown off while carrying army supplies.

Mr. Chairman,

In the course of civil war, various forms of human rights violations such as torture, rape, forced labor, arbitrary killings, extortion of money, properties and live stocks continue unabated.

As much as we welcome the talks between Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the military authorities in Rangoon, we are seriously concerned with the ongoing egregious violations of human rights in our country. We have witnessed the fact that the ongoing civil war and systematic and widespread use of forced labor by the Burmese army is interrelated. Because of the unmodernized means of transportation in the Burmese army, it is very likely that the military will pursue the use of forced labor to carry arms and ammunitions and food for the army in the conflict zones. Until and unless the civil war is ended, it is obvious that we cannot expect the end of practice of forced labor by the Burmese army. In the context of the talks between Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and SPDC, which started in October last year, we strongly believe that it is time for all conflicting parties to find ways and means for confidence building, and further substantive political dialogue. We call upon the Commission to encourage the SPDC to negotiate a nationwide cease-fire with all ethnic armed groups, which is a vital step for the end of forced labor and further the development of national reconciliation process in Burma.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

********************************************

Oldest Political Prisoner

Oral intervention to the UN Commission on Human Rights

Item 11: Civil and Political Rights

(Delivered by Deborah Stothard, April 5, 2001)

Owing to time constraints, content in [ ] will not be delivered

Mr. Chairman,

I speak on behalf of Aliran Kesedaran Negara.

I come from Southeast Asia, where there is an apparent obsession for breaking records. For example, Malaysia delights in boasting of the highest tower, tallest flagpole, longest serving Prime Minister, most farcical trial, etc etc.

Unfortunately in Burma, the military regime has so impoverished the country they cannot afford to build gigantic structures. Instead, they aspire to the record of having the oldest political prisoner.

I am of course referring to Dr U Saw Mra Aung, elected Member of Parliament for Mrauk-U (1) constituency [in Arakan State]. Dr Saw Mra Aung was born on April 23, 1908; he will become 93 years old during this session of the Commission [on Human Rights]. In October, the regime released six elderly political prisoners at the request of Mr. Razali Ismail, the UN Secretary-General's Special Envoy [on Myanmar]. Dr Saw Mra Aung was not included in this group. Perhaps the regime assumes that "ancient" is not the same as "elderly"! Dr Saw Mra Aung, who is also the Chairman of the Arakan League for Democracy, has been detained in a military camp outside Rangoon since 1998.

The Burmese regime is also eligible for the record of detaining political prisoners after they have completed their sentences. As we sit here in the Commission, 42 human beings that have already served the full extent of their jail sentences, continue to be unlawfully imprisoned. It is horrendous that these individuals, having been unjustly sentenced in the first place, are still in detention!

[Of this group,] I wish to highlight the situation of student leader, Min Ko Naing. Min Ko Naing continues to be held under harrowing conditions in Sittwe jail [in Arakan State]. In 1989, he was sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment; [this was] later commuted to 10 years under a general amnesty. Min Ko Naing was supposed to be a free man two years ago but he continues to be held under conditions that may have permanently disabled him.

[Amnesty International reports that Min Ko Naing was severely tortured and ill-treated during the early stages of his detention and his health has suffered as a consequence.]

Why keep him and the others any longer? Hasn't the regime sufficiently tortured and punished them and their loved ones?

Mr Chairman, owing to constraints of time, I will refrain from speaking of the hundreds of political prisoners, harsh prison conditions, the detentions without trial, the sorry state of the judicial system, religious intolerance and the raging impunity being perpetrated in Burma. I depend on the fact that the members and observers of the Commission have done sufficient reading of UN and other documents to grasp the seriousness of the situation.

Mr. Chairman and respected members of the Commission, I urge you to use all means at your disposal to ensure that Burma's government releases all political prisoners, including those who are sick, who have completed their sentences, the aged, and the ethnic nationality leaders. Further, that the government acknowledges and upholds all the civil and political rights of the peoples of Burma. The government should be reminded that pursuing the record of largest number of political prisoners, largest number of internally displaced people, largest number of youth excluded from education, and so on, is actually not something to be proud of.

The country of Burma celebrates the Buddhist New Year in two weeks' time. It is a tradition

that people release birds and fish in order to gain merit. The Burmese regime should realize that releasing people, instead of birds and fish would gain them infinitely more merit.

Thank you.

(attached photo and bio of Dr U Saw Mra Aung by AAPP)

****************************************

Fifty-seventh session

19^th March - 27^th April 2001


Item 11 - Civil and political rights, including the questions of:

(e) Religious intolerance

 

Mr Chairman,

I am speaking on behalf of Anti-Slavery International and I would like to call the special attention of the Commission to the growing restrictions on religious freedom in Asia. These are not confined to any particular religion, but occur frequently when the majority religion attempts to oppress and dominate minority religions through direct involvement of State authorities or through fundamentalist groups condoned by the State.

We wish to express our special concern regarding the situation in Laos. Recent developments suggest active persecution toward Christians choosing to worship in churches which do not have state approval. Those Christian believers have been subjected to detention, destruction of churches, restriction of freedom of movement, forced relocations, and other intimidation aimed at forcing them to recant their faith. The Lao Human Rights Group reported that, while a number of Church leaders and believers imprisoned in 1999 had been released in the course of the year 2000, new arrests have subsequently taken place and currently at least 25 church-goers are jailed in Laos. They have been accused to be enemies of the state and have been forced to sign documents to relinquish their faith. Some are detained for "illegal religious activities", while others have been arrested on the pretext of other illegal acts. Detention is usually taking place in appalling conditions: prisoners are kept in stocks and are deprived of food for days at a time. Christian families have also been forcibly relocated among non-Christian villages.

Since 1999, the Lao authorities forcibly closed down at least 50 churches. One church in Savannakhet province was confiscated by the authorities last year and is now being used as local government offices. Three church leaders who tried to demand compensation were arrested and are reportedly still in detention. Three others were jailed because they kept gathering in their homes after their church was confiscated.

In December 2000, only eight churches in Savannakhet province received permission to perform Christmas celebrations. More people were arrested for participating in Christmas services after having forcibly signed a statement giving up their faith.

Similarly, in Vietnam, only state-sponsored religious organisations are authorised. Independent religious activities are prohibited and their followers routinely harassed and imprisoned. Last February, thousands of Christians demonstrating against religious persecutions in the Central Highlands were brutally repressed by the army. We are also concerned about the situation of Venerable Thich Huyen Quang, Patriarch of the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam under house arrest without charge since 1982.

In Myanmar, the Government continues to monitor the activities of members of all religions, including Buddhism, in part because the clergy and congregation members have in the past become politically active. Moreover, government authorities coercively promote Buddhism over other religions, particularly among members of ethnic minorities. In Chin State, Christian Chins are facing harassment. Several hundred Chins fled to Guam in 2000 seeking refuge in the United States. Many of them complained of religious discrimination as a ground to their claims.

Rohingya Muslims in Arakan State have particularly been discriminated against on the basis of their religion. They have been denied citizenship, and in many instances their land was confiscated to make it available to new Buddhist settlers, a programme engineered by the State authorities. Muslims have been compelled to provide forced labour to build new settlements as well as Buddhist pagodas.

Societal attitudes have also shown widespread prejudice against Muslims in Myanmar and the government contributes to instigate anti-Muslim violence. Communal riots between Buddhists and Muslims took place in Sittwe during February 2001 that left at least ten people dead.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban militia which controls most of the country has recently created international outrage by its highly-publicised destruction of the 2,000 year old Buddha statues in Bamiyan, as well as the annihilation of collections of non-Muslim religious artifacts in the Kabul museum. The Taliban has also perpetrated widespread violations of human rights through aggressive imposition of their interpretation of the Sharia law.

Mr Chairman,

At the beginning of the new millenium, religion remains a deeply relevant and central aspect of human life and behaviour. Religious activities provide a spiritual dimension in life and society and determine values in relationships and decisions. The right to religious freedom lies at the core of human rights, and greater attention should be paid to this significant right.

We would therefore urge the Commission and the Special Rapporteur on Religious Intolerance to raise these issues with the governments involved and to pursue all possible measures to eradicate these prejudicial practices.

Thank you Mr Chairman.

**********************

Oral Intervention made by Ms.Thin Thin Aung
Item 11(a) Torture and Detention
Catholic Institute for International Relations
57th Session of the UNCHR
Geneva, Switzerland.

Mr. Chairman,

I am speaking here on behalf of the Burmese people who are living under the most repressive regime in the world. I am here to specifically speak Burma’s International obligations with regard to torture and detention.

In Burma, political activists, members of ethnic groups and student activists who have been at the forefront of the pro-democracy movement are the main victims of torture and illegal detention in Burma.

Over 1,500 people still remain imprisoned for political reasons. At least 34 Members of Parliament who were elected in the 1990 general elections still remain in prison and 36 MPs have been detained without trial in so-called "government guesthouses" since 1996.

Mr. Chairman,

Human rights violations in Burma have been well documented by international human rights organizations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the ILO and Burmese human rights organizations.

Torture has become an institution in the country. The security forces continue to use torture to extract information, punish, humiliate and control the people. The torture techniques commonly used by the junta’s security forces include: beatings rigorous enough to cause permanent injury, rolling an iron bar up and down the shins until the skin peels off, which is called "The Iron Road"; suspending victims from the ceiling and spinning them around while being beaten is called "The Helicopter"; and "Teik Peik" which involves the victims spending weeks or months in tiny brick cells with little air or light, and being forced to maintain difficult positions for prolonged periods, which is called "The Ponsan".

Moreover, political prisoners are denied adequate food, medical care and sanitation and they get seriously ill because of the harsh prison condition. Although the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has been conducting prison visits since May 1999, prison conditions are still extremely poor.

Even though every one of the political prisoners in Burma deserves equal urgent attention, I here want to draw your attention to some individual cases which need immediate care. One of them is Min Ko Naing, a student leader who was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment in 1989 for his peaceful political activities for democracy and human rights. He is the political prisoner who has been detained for the longest period of time in Burma. For most of his imprisonment, he has been held in complete solitary confinement.

He is currently held at Sittwe (Sittway) Prison in Rakhine State. He has been seriously tortured and ill-treated in detention. His health condition is deteriorating day by day and if urgent medical care is not given, he could soon be paralyzed. He is suffering from the physical and emotional effects of torture and solitary confinement. One prisoner who was released in December last year from the same prison described his condition in these words: "He has to totally depend on the iron railings in the prison to walk even a few steps and he is suffering from severe pains of his lower body due to various ways of torture".

Another prisoner of conscience who needs urgent medical care is U Tin Htun, who is serving a 20 years sentence at Thayet Prison in Upper Burma on charges of possessing and distributing illegal political journals and having contact with exiled opposition groups. He is suffering from hypertension, heart disease and mental health problems, yet he is receiving no medical treatment.

Mr. Chairman,

As you all know, our most respected leader and Nobel Peace Laureate Daw Aung San Suu Kyi continues to remain under illegal detention and is denied elementary human rights.

In conclusion, I would like to state that torture and illegal detention continue to occur throughout Burma and the ruling military junta continues to violate international human rights standards with impunity. On behalf of the people of Burma, I would like to appeal to the UN Commission on Human Rights to take urgent action for the release of all political prisoners, an end to illegal detention and a halt to all the human rights violations in Burma.

Thank you.

************************

Mr. Chairman,

My name is Naw Mu Si and I am from Burma. Today, I would like to bring your attention to the situation of Burmese children in my country, particularly in armed conflicts.

I spent most of my life in the refugee camp at Thai-Burma border. As a victim of the half-a-century long civil war, just like other children in the camps, I personally experienced the impact of the war on the lives of children. Violence and instability have had a considerable negative impact on the situation of children in Burma. Many of them have been subjected to various forms of violations of their rights and have been forced to flee areas affected by violence. Families have been forced to cross borders to seek for protection as refugees.

To flee from one's home is to experience a deep sense of loss, and the decision to flee is not taken lightly. Those who make this decision do so because they are in danger of being killed, tortured, raped, abducted, forcibly recruited, or slaved, among other reasons. They leave assets and property, relatives, friends, familiar environments, and established social networks behind them. Although the decision to leave is normally taken by adults, young children can recognize what is happening and can sense their parents' uncertainty and fear.

Children have witnessed the inhumane torture and killing of family members, relatives or neighbours by the Burmese military. Children have witnessed bomb shelling, landmine explosions, burning villages, destruction of their belongings, including crops and live stocks by the army.

Last year in August, I met a young girl of 12-years-old in the Umpium refugee camp in Mae Sod, Thailand. It was only six months ago that she arrived in the camp. This girl told me, "Once we heard the shelling we all ran away. I got separated from my parents. I did not know where to go, so I hid in the bushes. I was so terrified as I saw a group of soldiers dragged a woman, beaten and forced her to the ground, and raped her. I did not know who she was at first. As soon as soldiers left the scene, I went out to help her. Then I found it was my mother. She tried to talk to me, but I was not able to hear her words clearly. In the evening, she died from the injuries. I cried and cried not knowing where to go. I was also very hungry. I stayed beside my mother and until the next morning when two villagers from my village found me and took me along with them. I still don't know where my father and my two brothers are." She was adopted by a family and is currently staying in the camp.

Mr. Chairman,

According to the statistics of several NGOs working along the Thai-Burma border, there are 120,000 refugees living in the camps along the Thai-Burma border and at least 40% are children. Most of these children have no access to formal education. With the help of volunteer teachers, the camp committees have opened a school so that the children will have basic education. Still, lack of resources and lack of trained teachers is always an issue. Basic healthcare is very limited to all refugees. For example, there is only one clinic run by an NGO health workers for 10,000 refugees in a camp.

Mr Chairman,

The Burmese military regime claims that it has improved education for children in the country. Official statistics indicate that a quarter of school age children never even enroll in primary school, and that drop out rates are very high. Of those who begin the primary education program, only a third complete the full 5 years. Many people in Burma cannot even afford to send or keep their children at school.

Primary school attendance is free in Burma, but in fact parents incur significant expenses in sending their children to school for textbooks, uniforms, exercise books, stationery, a mandatory yearly contribution to the Parent Teacher Association (PTA) fund, and ad hoc contributions in cash and in kind for school improvements.

Poor families who cannot afford to pay fees to schools are often doubly penalized when they cannot maintain even a minimal household income without sending their children out to work.

The Burmese junta insists on its commitment to "Education for All". However, the SPDC cannot supply accurate and updated information about the educational status of children. Anecdotal evidence indicates that armed conflict and poverty are the two primary causes of Burma’s poor state of education.

Mr. Chairman,

Let me call on the Commission to urge the military regime to end any occurrence of forced relocation, displacement and other types of involuntary population movements which deeply affects families and the rights of children.

I'd also like to call upon the Commission to encourage the SPDC to negotiate a nationwide cease-fire with the armed groups, which can create a peaceful environment for all children to receive proper education.

************************************

Oral Intervention by Dr. Thaung Htun
Worldview International Foundation
Agenda Item (13)

Thank you, Madame Chair,

Let me begin by expressing our appreciation for the adoption of the Optional Protocol to the Convention of the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict at the 10th Anniversary of the Convention last year. Increasing the minimum age of recruitment for soldiers in time of armed conflict is indeed a significant achievement and a milestone in the international efforts to protect the Rights of the Child. Without such conscientious efforts, the alarming problem of child victims globally can only worsen.

Children, as the Secretary General had correctly pointed out, have increasingly been victimized both as targets and perpetrators of violence in the armed conflicts of recent years. Children are the most affected when they are internally displaced or become refugees as a result of war. They are coerced into taking up arms as soldiers and sent to the battlefields to get killed in action or become victims of landmines. Horrible experiences of war have traumatized children and affected their childhood development. Millions of children today are also being deprived of access to food, health and education and are dying because of starvation and even from preventable diseases.

In the past, the doctrine of "non-interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation" was a stumbling block to the attempts by international humanitarian agencies to protect and provide humanitarian assistance to children caught in the midst of conflict. We are happy to note, however, that the right to intervene for humanitarian ends and the protection of human rights has gained ground since a few years back. A new ethic that places human rights at the center of development and makes a first call for children is emerging. We are encouraged to see UN agencies pioneering the practice of convincing parties in a conflict to designate certain periods of tranquility, to respect humanitarian or security zones and to open safe corridors to permit humanitarian workers to reach pockets of children in war zones.

My country, Burma, has a young demographic structure with an estimated 36% of the population under 15 years of age. Recent World Bank and UNICEF reports reveal the situation of silent emergency for Burmese children. Let me highlight that with a few statistics:

· A slightly higher infant mortality rate (71 compared to an average of 68) and a significantly higher child mortality rate (113 compared to an average of 77 in four other economies)

· About 175,000 children under five die each year, mostly from readily preventable or treatable diseases–mainly due to lack of even 40 most essential drugs

· An appallingly high 10% of children under three suffer from severe malnutrition. This primarily is the result of untreated infections and infestations; progressively eroding purchasing power and forced resettlements.

· Less than 20% of primary school children complete all five years.

· Out of 120,000 Burmese refugees living along the Thai-Burma border and 2 millions internally displaced population, at least one-fourths are children. Refugees and displaced children are most vulnerable to sexual abuses, trafficking, conscription as military porters, human shields or human mine sweepers and forced recruitment as soldiers.

· Safe water supply in rural and urban areas (31% and 38%, respectively) is half that of the developing world as a whole. Even urban water supplies remain untreated.

· Many children are orphaned, abandoned, trafficked, exploited in the labor force, institutionalized or jailed. Some are used in drug running, while others are targets of ethnic discrimination.

All these problems are linked to one common factor, chronic and malignant failure by the State to provide the survival, protection, and development needs of children. This failure is directly linked to the ongoing more than 50 years of civil war between the military regime and armed ethnic groups demanding greater autonomy. These problems also reflect the authorities' persistent refusal to allocate any part of foreign exchange earnings to the non-military social sector. The published budgetary figures show that military spending per capita exceeds that spent on health by nine times, and that on education by more than two times. (Source: IMF Report 1998, Table 33)

What all key players on the Burmese political stage have to keep in mind is that humanitarian consequences arising from the failure to address the emergency needs of children are grave and they threaten the nation’s future. The talks that are going on between Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the National League for Democracy, and the ruling authorities are a hopeful sign for change to the Burmese society. In the context of this new development, the Commission should encourage all leaders of parties involved in conflict in Burma:

(1) To design a nationwide humanitarian ceasefire or days of tranquility in the conflict zones so that UN agencies and international NGOs can initiate a massive immunization program and deliver emergency food aid and other emergency humanitarian assistance to the children in conflict zones, and

(2) To integrate agenda of children in peace making and peace building process.

Thank you.

*********************

Mr. Chairman (Madame Chairperson),

I would like to emphasize the fact that the situation of human rights in the Shan State of Burma remains as bad as in previous years. The massive forced relocation, displacement and other types of involuntary population movements carried out by the Burmese military regime in the central Shan State since 1996 is still continuing up to this day and still badly affecting the lives of the people.

Over 300,000 people from nearly 1,500 villages, mostly farmers, have been dispossessed of their lands and homes and forcibly displaced by the army. Thousands have been seized by the army to work for road construction and other projects without pay.

The relocation areas are still being declared "free-fire" zones and people found in these areas are still being shot on sight. At least four massacres were documented in 2000 in Kun-Hing township alone. The worst was on 20 May 2000, when more than 60 internally displaced villagers, including elderly, women and children were killed. These villagers had been hiding in the jungle. When they heard that a patrol of soldiers was coming, they fled towards the Salween River. When they reached the bank of the river, the military troops caught up with them and opened fire killing most of them.

Among the 300,000 displaced, over 120,000 fled across the border to Thailand, while the remaining are hiding in the jungle near their old villages. Trying to survive, they are facing tremendous hardship. They live without security, regular food, shelter, and access to medical care.

Mr. Chairman (Madame Chairperson),

Another cause of the massive involuntary population movement in Shan State is the so-called resettlement of the ethnic "Wa" villagers from the north of Shan State to the south. Since the end of 1999, the United Wa State Party, which has a cease-fire agreement with the military regime, has forcibly relocated about 100,000 villagers from northern Shan State down to the southern Shan border areas.

The Wa resettlement, which is continuing, has been as devastating as the forced relocation in Central Shan State. Many villagers did not want to leave their ancestral homes. They were forced to move at very short notice and were transported by trucks. They were brought to an area where no sufficient assistance was provided. The poor living conditions and sanitation problems have led to epidemics. This killed more than a thousand settlers during the latter part of 2000. These forced relocations and resettlements are causing incalculable social damage.

Mr. Chairman (Madame Chairperson),

The number of internally displaced people in Shan State is increasing. One major cause is the blatant use of forced labour by the Burmese military in Tachilek township on the northern Thai-Burma border. Since early February 2001, the Burmese military has forced approximately 600 civilians to work as unpaid porters. These porters have to carry ammunition and military rations, dig trenches at strongholds and fetch water for the soldiers, man the strongholds for several days until another new batch of 600 porters replaces them.

Mr. Chairman (Madame Chairperson),

I would like to stress that the Burmese military regime is continuing its campaign of forced relocation and forced resettlement in Shan State adding to forced labour. As long as these violations continue, the number of internally displaced, or dispossessed Shan people will increase and more Shan people will flee across the border to Thailand.

Therefore, I sincerely request the Commission and the international community to urge the Burmese military regime to stop its campaign of forced relocation and resettlement in Shan State and all other forms of human rights violations.

Thank you.


************************************

(Agenda Item 14 b)

Saw Kwe Htoo Win

Committee for Internally Displaced Karen People Burma (Liberated Area)


Thank you, Mr. Chairman,

The creation of a subsidiary body to the UN Commission on Human Rights: the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities itself was a clear recognition of the international community on the issues concerning minorities and groups around the world.

Customary international law enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations also reflects the rights of minorities: "All peoples have the right freely to determine, without external interference, their political status and to pursue their economic, social and cultural development." ... Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) also recognizes certain rights in respect of persons belonging to "ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities." The 1948 Genocide Convention protects "national, ethnical, racial, or religious" groups from campaigns to destroy them, in whole or in part.

The protection of minorities requires the implementation of the rights to citizenship, language, education, culture,

In this context, I would like to draw your attention to the situation of minorities in Burma (Myanmar), specifically the Karen. Burma (Myanmar) is a country comprised of different groups of minorities - "[groups] numerically inferior to the rest of the population of a State, in a non-dominant position, whose members – being nationals of the State – possess ethnic, religious or linguistic characteristics differing from those of the rest of the population and show, if only implicitly, a sense of solidarity, directed toward preserving their culture, traditions, religion or language".

Successive Burmese regimes have refused to recognize the rights of minorities in Burma. Intolerance grew to a point where the country found itself in Civil War from which we have been suffering for more than fifty years. This same internal armed conflict between the Burmese government and the Karen people has created more than 120, 000 (a hundred and twenty thousand) Karen refugees along the Thai-Burma border. The estimate of internally displaced Karen people living in the Burmese jungle is now between 200, 000 and 300,000. At this point, we are unable to give an estimate of numbers of Karen (illegal) migrant workers in Thailand.

Nevertheless, these threatening numbers should already tell the Commission about the situation of the Karen people in Burma, where the rights of minorities to citizenship, language, education and other guaranteed rights of minorities are far from reality for the Karen people or for other minority groups in similar situations.

For a Karen woman who left her husband's dead body in a field as she fled from the Burmese troops, traditional burial was a wish that would never come true. For a people most of whose lives are spent running to escape military persecution, minority rights such as the right to education are far from reality. A Karen internally displaced person cried out to a relief worker: "We had been walking for 5 days, we had lost our homes, and we could not go back. What is our future? Where will we go? What will happen to us?"

Not to neglect the situation of our fellow minorities such as the Mon people in Burma, I would like to bring to your attention that these people are also undergoing the same situation under the repressive Burmese regime. The most recent and notable suppression of their rights is the prohibition against the teaching and learning of Mon literature organized by the Mon Literacy and Culture Committee (MLCC). The prohibition was ordered and enforced by Unit No. 5 of the Directorate of Defense Services Intelligence (DDSI) of the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) through the Mon State Peace and Development Council (General Secretary Col. Aung Maw Maw). Details of this incident can be obtained from The Mon Forum Newsletter, Issue No. 6/2000.

These are just some of the accounts we wish to bring to your attention. We have submitted all these information to the Special Rapporteur for his report on the situation of human rights in Burma.

The international community recognises that minorities that are treated properly by their governments, as individuals, will probably be less likely to join separatist movements. In that sense, the long and ongoing minorities' movements for freedom in Burma should very clearly tell the Commission of their situation.

************************************

Oral Intervention: Item 14

Delivered by Deborah Stothard, April 12, 2001

Mr/Madam Chairperson,

I speak on behalf of Aliran Kesedaran Negara.

I wish to use this time to highlight two particular cases, that although quite different, stem from the same root causes – the oppression of ethnic nationality and religious minorities in Burma, and the prevalent use of forced relocation.

These causes have led to an increase in the number of internally displaced persons. Many of these internally displaced persons end up becoming refugees, trafficked persons and migrant workers seeking to escape the intense oppression perpetrated by the regime known as the State Peace an Development Council of Myanmar.

On January 18^th, Nang Thwe, a 14 year old girl, who came from the relocation sites in Lai Kha township, Shan State, was sold at the town of Mae Sai, in Thailand. Her brother traveled to Mae Sai to try to bring her back home. However, the owner who bought the girl demanded that he buy his sister back for 20,000 baht [about USD 500]. He returned to Burma to collect some money to purchase his sister’s freedom. Tragically, when he arrived in Thailand with some money, he was unable to get her back. Since then 14-year-old Nang Thwe and her "owner" have disappeared.

Nang Thwe and many young people like her are vulnerable to being trafficked because of human rights violations committed by the military regime in Burma. In some cases, we can only pray that she will be able to stay alive and be "lucky" enough to eventually be rescued by welfare groups in Thailand. Even then, there is no guarantee that these young women will be returned home safely – the regime has not committed itself to such repatriation programmes. In addition, the villages of these young people may have been forcibly relocated several times, or their communities may have become fled to hide from security forces in the jungles of Burma.

The problem of children of Burma being trafficked to work as labourers, sex workers and domestic help is already well known to the Commission. In March, the High Commissioner for Human Rights Mrs Mary Robinson herself was able to witness this problem when she visited a children’s shelter near Bangkok, Thailand.

Therefore, it is somewhat amazing to hear the regime’s ambassador His Excellency U Mya Than this week deny that there have human rights violations in Myanmar. Has the SPDC somehow miraculously eradicated the scourge of human rights violations between March and this week, or does he mean that the SPDC has successfully exported all its violations across the border? Or are we talking aout two entirely different countries – is there another Myanmar or Burma existing in a parallel universe that is free of human rights violations, and has H E U Mya Than beamed himself down from that planet?

Mr/Madam Chairperson,

In Malaysia, Mr Peter Hee Man, of Chin ethnic nationality from Burma faces deportation into the hands of the SPDC, merely because he went to observe a protest at a public event held by the Myanmar embassy in Kuala Lumpur.

Aliran urges the Malaysian government not to deport Peter Hee Man, who was detained along with three Malaysians who were part of a group that paraded Aung San Suu Kyi T-shirts in front of guests at the embassy reception. Mr Hee Man was unlawfully detained by security agents of the embassy who then insisted that the Malaysian police arrest him. He was subsequently released and immediately re-arrested for being an illegal immigrant. Mr Hee Man has a pending application to be recognized as a refugee by the office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. He is currently being detained at the Immigration Detention Centre in Macap, Melaka state pending deportation. UNHCR is attempting to process his application, however the Malaysian government has given no assurance that Peter Hee Man will be allowed to stay in Malaysia until his UNHCR application is processed.

Aliran calls on the Malaysian government to stay Mr Peter Hee Man’s deportation until his application for refugee status and subsequent resettlement can be processed. We are convinced that if he is deported, he will be deported to the Myanmar or Burma that DOES perpetrate human rights violations against activists and people of ethnic and religious minorities. We note that Mr Peter Hee Man has been identified as a pro-democracy sympathizer, also that he is of Chin ethnic background and is a Christian. It is a documented fact that the Chin people have been targeted for abuse by the military regime on these grounds. Deporting Mr Peter Hee Man would be an act that would condemn him to torture or even death at the hands of the Burmese military junta.

Thank you.

***************************************

April 12, 2001

Oral Intervention on Agenda Item 14 (a) Migrant Workers

Catholic Institute for International Relations

Delivered by Nang Lao Liang Won

57th Session of the UNCHR

Geneva, Switzerland

Mr. Chairperson (Madame Chairperson)

I am here to speak on behalf of the "undocumented" Burmese migrant workers in Thailand, with whom I have been working for several years. According to the Royal Thai Government figures, there are more than 1.2 million Burmese working in Thailand. Unlike the usual profile of migrant workers, these Burmese migrants have fled from half-a -century civil war and on-going gross human rights abuses committed by the Burmese junta. In particular, I am referring to systematic forced relocation campaigns and forced labor. Most migrants come from the areas where on-going gas pipeline projects, and areas along the Salween River where mega-dams will be built.

Mr. Chairperson,

The military offensives of the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) against the ethnic armed groups are still going on. People from the conflict areas are fleeing into Thailand. For example, the offensive against the Shan State Army on the northern Thai-Burma border since last February has forced hundreds of Shan people to flee into Thailand.

Mr. Chairperson,

The open market and the private sector, which the SPDC has claimed to be the "major" components of its economy, have benefited only those within the SPDC circle, thus causing serious economic instability. Today's unofficial exchange rate is 556 Kyats to one US dollar. (The lowest salary of a civil servant is 4,500 Kyat per month). The price of consumer goods is skyrocketing every day. Added to these harsh economic conditions, lack of food, lack of job opportunities and loss of hope have resulted in the flight of migrants from both urban and rural areas throughout Burma into Thailand in search of a means to support their families.

Mr. Chairperson,

In Thailand, Burmese migrant workers are doing jobs nicknamed the 3Ds --

Dirty, Difficult and Dangerous on the lowest level of the Thai labour market, and at well-below minimum wages. Because of their status, undocumented migrant workers are open to abuse and violence from Thai employers, unscrupulous individuals and certain corrupt officials. Women workers face more difficulties than their male counterparts. When they were in Burma, they were vulnerable to rape and sexual abuse by the government troops. In Thailand, they continue to be vulnerable to similar abuses by Thai employers and individuals and some authorities. For fear of arrest and deportation, few survivors of such abuses are willing to come forward to press charges against the perpetrators.

Mr. Chairperson,

The SPDC is fully responsible for pushing the Burmese people out of Burma. It is the root cause of all the problems faced by these people in Thailand. Ironically, the returning migrants are accused of being traitors to the country. Some returning migrants are immediately arrested and forced to work on government infrastructure schemes without pay. Many are stopped at every checkpoint and subjected to extortion by a variety of SPDC authorities. Some deported migrants are stopped at checkpoints a few miles from the Thai-Burmese border and questioned not only about where they worked and what they did in Thailand, but also whether or not they had direct contact with pro-democracy groups. Moreover, The SPDC blamed Thailand for allowing Burmese citizens to work secretly and illegally.

Mr. Chairperson,

Here, I would like to highlight how indifferent the SPDC is {compared to other governments } towards its own citizens in Thailand. Last year, a British tourist named Kristy was murdered in Chiangmai, Thailand. The British Embassy in Bangkok was the key player in having the case thoroughly investigated and brought to a conclusion. In contrast, for the past ten years, there have been numerous cases of rape/ murder/ trafficking of Burmese migrant women in Thailand; but to date, we have heard no comments or responses from the SPDC. Recent examples are: a December 07, 2000 "Nation " report about an unidentified Burmese migrant woman who was raped and killed and a February 11, 2001 "Bangkok Post " article about the arrest of 33 Burmese girls after two Shan women informed the police that they had been trafficked into prostitution.

Mr. Chairperson,

Unless there is a significant change in Burma's political climate, there will be more and more people fleeing from Burma to the neighbouring countries, working as undocumented migrant workers for their survival, and encountering various types of human rights abuses.

I would therefore like to call upon the Commission to urge the SPDC to end the abuses which have forced people to flee to Thailand; to stop intimidating and abusing returning migrants, especially women and children; and to create conditions conducive to their voluntary return and full reintegration in safety and dignity. Considering the vulnerable position of undocumented migrants, I would like to take this opportunity to call on the Commission to encourage the Royal Thai Government to sensitize all relevant {Thai} authorities so that they will actively prevent any abuse of migrants, especially women on Thai soil; to convince them to allow these refugees and migrant workers who are filling Thai manual and/or unskilled labour to stay until A nation-wide cease-fire with all ethnic armed groups is fully implemented.

Thank You.

******************************************

ANTI-SLAVERY INTERNATIONAL

United Nations Commission on Human Rights

Fifty-seventh session

19^th March - 27^th April 2001

1. Migrant workers
2. Minorities

(c) Mass exoduses and displaced persons

Mr Chairman,

Anti Slavery International would like to call the attention of the Commission to the impact of statelessness, especially when based on ethnicity, in generating mass displacement of population in Asia.

This is the case of the Rohingya people in Burma, an ethnic minority from northern Arakan State professing Islam. Over the last two decades, Bangladesh has been burdened by two mass exoduses of Rohingya refugees, each of approximately 250,000. While most of them have been repatriated, more than 100,000 are currently living in Bangladesh in refugee like situations and this invisible population is now labelled "economic migrants".

The Rohingya Muslims, in common with other people in Burma, especially the ethnic minorities, are subject to forced labour, forced relocation, rape and plunder by the military. Testimonies collected in early January 2001 report continued instances of forced labour exacted by the authorities even after the measures adopted by the ILO. In addition to these abuses, the Rohingyas are deprived of the fundamental rights of citizenship by the Citizenship Act of 1982. [This law was clearly designed to exclude the Rohingyas from the rights of citizenship as it defined as citizens those who belongs to one of the 135 "national races" -among which the Rohingya do not feature-, or those who can provide evidence that their ancestors settled in the country before 1823, the start of the British colonisation of Arakan.] After UNHCR intervention in the ’90s, they were issued with a temporary registration card, which clearly states that it does not constitute evidence of citizenship. Their present legal status therefore amounts to de facto statelessness.

As Human Rights Watch wrote in a recent report: "Citizenship, or nationality, is a fundamental human right that facilitates the ability to exercise other human rights. Burma, however, continues to treat the Rohingya as foreign residents, on the basis of their ethnic origin. […] Where an entire group is arbitrarily denied this basic right on the basis of ethnicity, this discrimination is rising to the level of persecution."

As a direct consequence of their lack of legal status, the Rohingyas are deprived of the same freedom of movement as other citizens and residents in Burma. Travelling outside their village tracts requires a pass from several levels of authorities, which they have to pay for. Restrictions on movement have direct economic implications. Most cannot afford regular travel permits, and the burdensome procedure limits their access to health facilities, to higher education, employment opportunities and to markets. This lack of mobility also results in obstacles to trade, reducing the range of goods available and thus increasing the costs of basic commodities. Added to the forced labour, confiscation of land, rape and other abuses, the Rohingyas’ statelessness create intolerable and dehumanizing conditions which led to massive forced migrations.

Another area of major concern is the situation of undocumented Burmese migrants in detention. While, in Thailand, many have been indiscriminately repatriated across the border with no regard as to their safety or status, their situation is even more critical in countries such as Bangladesh where deportation only takes place with the collaboration of the consular services of their country of origin. Currently, over 1,000 "foreigners" are held in Bangladeshi jails for illegal entry. Most of them are from Burma. After serving their sentence, they have not been released since the Burmese authorities have not recognised them as citizens of Myanmar worthy of repatriation. A large number of them are Rohingyas who have little hope to be freed considering their conditions of statelessness. [However, it should be noted that last January the Bangladesh authorities did finally released 12 Rohingya women and their children from Jessore jail who had been imprisoned for the last 3 years. These women were kept in custody after being rescued by the police while on the verge of being trafficked to India.] Besides undocumented Rohingyas, hundreds of other Burmese fishermen caught fishing illegally in Bangladeshi territorial waters are held in "safe custody" for years since the Burmese authorities has not collaborated in their deportation. Among them are several Burmese fishermen whose boat capsized in a storm in 1999. After drifting at sea for several days, they were rescued by a ship which disembarked them in Chittagong. Subsequently they were arrested for illegal entry and have been imprisoned ever since. Two other Burmese fishermen tested HIV positive are presently detained in isolation in a hospital in Dhaka. One of these two HIV infected migrants has already been confined in the hospital room for over four years. According to the prison authorities he is still "under diagnosis" and does not benefit from any treatment. With no hope of release, and awaiting death in detention, he attempted suicide on several occasions during 2000.

Mr Chairman,

Rohingya refugees and displaced persons have escaped from military oppression and have been deprived of the right to citizenship. They find themselves in highly vulnerable conditions in Bangladesh and other Asian countries.

At the same time, migrant workers are held in detention in Bangladesh under appalling circumstances and are denied their basic human rights.

Recommendations

Anti-slavery International urges the Commission and the newly appointed Special Rapporteur on Myanmar to address the status of statelessness of the Rohingya people with the Government of Myanmar.

In addition we strongly request the Commission to:

* address with governments in the region the issues of migrant workers in detention,

* promote the early ratification by all states in Asia of the UN Convention for the Protection of Migrants and the UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness

* recommend the inclusion of an item on statelessness and racism on the agenda of the World Conference Against Racism

Thank you Mr Chairman.

*************************************************

United Nations Commission On Human Rights

Mr. Chairman,

As many of my brothers and sisters from Burma have stated to this Commission, the Burmese Army has not stopped committing atrocities against the non-Burman peoples and the civilian population in general. There is no substantial progress in the respect of human rights and no solution to the deep-seated socio-economic and political conditions facing the indigenous peoples in Burma.

Under the long years of suppression and increasing military rule, the Chin indigenous people are experiencing many of the same abuses as other ethnic indigenous groups living inside and along the border regions of Burma. However, a specific human rights abuse suffered by the Chin people is religious persecution, even though the first and second constitutions of Burma accorded freedom of religion. In theory, Burma is a union of multi-ethnic societies founded on the principle of equality and fraternity in which the citizens have the right to practice and enjoy their own religions peacefully in a peaceful way. The practice is very different.

For more than one hundred years, the religion of most Chins has been Christianity, but this has now unfortunately become foreign in the eyes of the Burmese military government.

Allow me to cite two specific examples to support my statement. The Christian Chin community has long wanted to construct Chin centenary building in the Chin Capital, Haka, but is repeatedly denied authorization to build. In contrast, the Burmese government funded the construction of the International Theravada Buddhist Missionary University in Rangoon, which opened in December 1998. The other related example concerns the arrest and imprisonment of Pastor Grace, who was arrested on February 13, 2001. She is now presently detained in Haka army camp, where prison conditions are extremely severe, inadequate and precarious for a woman prisoner. Her brother is currently serving a two-year prison sentence at the Kalaywa concentration camp.

Mr. Chairman,

In the process of through human development, free and peaceful communication is essential, among many other things. It is also important for my people to look forward to an open and better society. But regretfully , because of the clear and sustained policy of isolating the indigenous peoples from the international community pursued by the successive Burmese regimes, we have not been able to initiate our own development. A few years ago, the military regime launched a tourism drive. However, in spite of tourist promotion, visits to the Chin State still remain forbidden since the 1960s.

Mr. Chairman,

Given the political experiences of our country for the last five decades, we are gravely concerned about the continuing policy and intentions of the Burmese army towards the future of the indigenous peoples of Burma. Ignorance and continued denial of fundamental human rights to the indigenous peoples in Burma will only amount to weaken the stability of the Union , and hinder the peace building process, which is most needed and will lead to the eventual lasting peace for the nation.

In this respect, we hope that the non-Burman groups will soon be able to take part in the peace process that seems to have started in Rangoon. This will make it more likely that the issues and problems that face all the peoples of Burma will be sincerely addressed, and we count on the support of the international community in this critical process.

Thank you.

********************************************

Item 17: Human Rights Defenders

(Delivered by Deborah Stothard, April 17, 2001)

Owing to time constraints, content in [ ] will not be delivered

Mr/Madam Chairperson,

I speak on behalf of Aliran [Kesedaran Negara].

For the past three years, I have been trying to convince my colleague, Mr CHUA Tian Chang, [also known as Tian Chua], to participate at the Commission on Human Rights. Tian, [as he is popularly known], has been an active human rights educator and defender in Malaysia and the region.

In 1999, Tian couldn’t be here because he was badly beaten by the police at a peaceful demonstration in Kuala Lumpur on April 14. [He was protesting the unjust conviction of the former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim]. Despite his injuries Tian and another human rights defender Abdul Malek Hussein, sat in front of a police truck laden with acid water cannon to protect his fellow activists. Both of them were arrested and detained for "attempted suicide".

Last year, the Malaysian authorities descended in full force upon Kuala Lumpur to seal it off from potential demonstrations [on the first anniversary of Anwar’s conviction]. Tian was arrested on April 15 for speaking at a press conference. While he was not physically harmed on this occasion, the police made up for their laxity in August by assaulting him so severely that his spine was fractured. In the past two years he has been arrested and beaten by police so many times that it is a wonder the man can still walk.

This year, Tian’s participation at the Commission is absolutely out of the question because he, along with six other people was arrested under Malaysia’s draconian Internal Security Act last week. On April 10^th and 11^th, the following human rights activists were rounded up under the ISA which effectively allows indefinite detention without trial: Ezam Mohamad Noor, N Gopalakrishnan, Tian Chua, Saari Sungip, Hishamuddin Rais, Abdul Ghani Haroon, and Raja Petra Kamaruddin. They have been detained incommunicado for the past week; they have not been allowed to communicate with their families or their lawyers. Our grave concerns for their safety are justified by the "tradition" of various forms of torture against ISA detainees.

Mr/Madam Chairperson,

These men were detained because they were planning a peaceful rally to present a memorandum to the National Human Rights Commission on April 14. However, the national police chief Norian Mai appears to have lifted the script of a Hollywood action movie by making the fantastic claim that they had tried to obtain explosives including rocket launchers and petrol bombs to attack security forces. The nationalistic Prime Minister Mahathir, who is overwhelmingly attached to the ISA despite its colonial origins, has publicly supported this particular use of the ISA because there is "insufficient evidence" [to charge them in a court of law].

Mr/Madam Chairperson,

It is bewildering to see that the Malaysian government, having attained membership of the Commission [on Human Rights], seems to have increased its abuses of human rights. I hope that you will see it fit to remind them that membership does not grant them special dispensation or immunity in this context. Further I hope that you, and other members of this Commission will convince the Malaysian government to immediately and unconditionally release these human rights defenders.

Mr/Madam Chairperson,

The military regime in Burma seems bent on reducing the number of human rights defenders and educators to the level of an endangered species. While time does not permit me to name all of them, I wish to draw your attention to the case of Mrs San San Nwe, sentenced to 10 years in 1994, partly for speaking with the Special Rapporteur on Myanmar. Mrs San San Nwe is being held under atrocious conditions, she cannot even stand up in her low-ceilinged cell, and is only allowed 15 minutes of speech per day!

Mr/Madam Chairperson,

While it is encouraging to see the Royal Government of Thailand express its commitment to human rights promotion and education, I also note with concern that this commitment does not appear to be consistent in its application. Recently, several human rights educators, including myself, were declared persona non grata on grounds of national security and denied entry into Thailand. I have been denied clarification or an opportunity to respond to allegations, if any, in this context. I sincerely hope that the Thai authorities will understand that human rights education and advocacy is no threat to a democratic country and reconsider their decision.

Thank you.

*********************************************

COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

April 19

Item 17,

Delivered by Mr Soe Aung

Mr. Chairman,

I am speaking on behalf of the War Resisters International.

Mr. Chairman,

In my country, Burma, people are arrested and put in jail for simply practicing their right to promote democracy and human rights. Almost all of them are tortured, punished and imprisoned under harsh conditions, conditions that anyone in the world would have never imagined in their life.

Believe it or not, Mr. Chairman,

These things are happening in Burma even after talks began between the main opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD) and the military regime in early October last year.

Mr. Chairman,

I would like to draw your attention and that of the commission to the cases of two young students who tried to promote democracy and human rights.

Mr. Chairman,

Thet Win Aung was only a high school student during the 1988 democratic uprising in Burma, but this did not prevent him from becoming a prominent leader of the movement. During the wave of student protests that spread across the country, advocating an end to military rule and the realization of democracy and basic human rights, Thet Win Aung became Vice-General Secretary of an underground high school student organization, the Basic Education Student Union (BESU) in 1989. He was dismissed from school and imprisoned in September 1991 for nine months because of his activities in BESU. During this period of detention he was severely tortured. Following his release he became a leading member of the All Burma Federation of Student Unions, the umbrella organization for student unions in Burma. He took part in student demonstrations in December 1996 and, in 1998, helped to organize student protests against the poor quality of education and denial of human rights. Thet Win Aung was arrested in October 1998. In January 1999 he was sentenced to 52 years' imprisonment, which was increased to 59 years after further interrogation.

Thet Win Aung's severe sentence has made him somewhat of a celebrity in Burma. After the BBC radio programme broadcast his case, bribes were offered to prison guards by inmates to catch a glimpse of him. To date, this is the highest sentence given to a political prisoner in Burma.

Mr. Chairman,

Myo Min Zaw (a) Moe Hein Aung, who is a member of the All Burma Federations of Student Union (ABFSU) and the chairperson of the United Front of Youth and Students (UFYS) was sentenced to 38 years’ imprisonment because of he was a leader of a student demonstration that at Hledan Junction in Rangoon on 24 August 1998. He was denied legal counsel during his sham trial. No parole has been allowed and recently his sentence has been extended to 59 years. (According to the BJM (Burmese Jail Manual) law, all prisoners have the right to parole for one third of the given prison term)

Mr. Chairman,

May I mention, again at this 57^th session of the Commission on Human Rights, that to promote democracy and human rights in my country, Burma or Myanmar, is still the worst crime in the eyes of the military regime. An array of laws and the judicial system have been routinely abused in order to gag and detain human rights defenders. Therefore it is very surprising to hear the regime’s claims in this very hall that they are promoting human rights.

Thank you.

Foxes and chickens in Burma and Malaysia

Oral Intervention at the Un Commission on Human Rights

Item 18: Effective functioning of human rights mechanisms

(b) National institutions and regional arrangements

(Delivered by Deborah Stothard, April 19, 2001, 2310 Geneva time)

Owing to time constraints, content in [ ] will not be uttered

Mr/Madam Chairperson,

I speak on behalf of Aliran [Kesedaran Negara].

While the commitment of various governments to establish human rights agencies is to be applauded in principle, most human rights defenders cannot help but feel some degree of skepticism. [Given their track records], we have cause to think that some of these initiatives are more motivated by a need to "keep up with the Joneses" [than a commitment to promote and defend human rights]. The emphasis on form instead of content, and more importantly, effectiveness makes these institutions vulnerable to contempt and ridicule.

Let's start with Burma, also known to the Commission as Myanmar. I am referring to the country on planet earth bounded by Thailand, China, India and Bangladesh, and not the human rights violations-free Shangri-la located in a parallel universe that is often spoken of by the Myanmar delegation.

A human rights committee was established a year ago by the regime in preparation for the establishment of a national human rights institution. Amazingly, the membership of the Committee reads like a "Who's Who" of human rights violators in that country. For example, Lt. Gen. Khin Nyunt, [the regime's Secretary 1 and] the head of Military Intelligence is the chief patron of this Committee. [When he is not patronizing the Human Rights Committee], Lt. Gen. Khin Nyunt spends most of his time directing the persecution of human rights and democracy activists utilizing arbitrary arrests, interrogation and torture. He also toys with the judicial system and officiates at religious structures that have been built with forced labour.

Col. Tin Hlaing, the Home Affairs Minister, responsible for the atrocious state of the country's prisons, chairs the Myanmar Human Rights Committee. It is Col. Tin Hlaing's "contribution" to human rights that has seen such prisoners as 55-year-old writer Mrs San San Nwe imprisoned in a dog kennel, where she is unable to stand up.

To quote Nobel Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, this is indeed a case of the fox looking after the chickens.

Now, let's move on to the National Human Rights Commission of Malaysia, Suhakam.

While I cannot deny that Suhakam is doing some good work under adverse conditions, it has not lived up to expectations [of the civil society in promoting and protecting human rights in Malaysia]. This is mainly due to:

1. Lack of independence [as outlined in the Paris Principles] and abundance of general restrictions [contained in the Suhakam Act].

2. Lack of a reasonable level of [material and human] resources

3. Lack of understanding of key human rights concepts amongst some of its commissioners.

4. Inability to ensure that its findings, if any, are abided by.

[Since its inception in April 2000], Suhakam has received hundreds of complaints but has not been able to investigate or respond to most of them. The commission has only managed to carry out one public inquiry [into allegations of serious police brutality in relation to a public assembly on November 5 last year].

Last year, I noted that the Malaysian authorities had "launched" Suhakam with a massive crackdown. This year the government is "celebrating" Suhakam's first anniversary with the [Internal Security Act] detentions without trial of 7 human rights defenders. [While calling for the release of the seven people arrested under the Internal Security Act last week, Suhakam failed to call for the abolition of the law that is a root cause of many human rights violations in Malaysia.]

[Suhakam has also made recommendations governing the way in which public assemblies should be conducted, without confronting the reality that arbitrary behavior of the police is the root problem.]

[In response to the Malaysian delegation's assertion that the ISA detainees are militant activists and not human rights defenders, let me take this opportunity to note that] all over the world, national monuments are dedicated to "militants" who struggled for freedom and independence with their fists upraised, not kneeling to beg for police permits. It is regrettable that the upraised fist is now a trigger for police violence and detention without trial. Human rights defenders, regardless of their political affiliation, are also human beings deserving of their rights.

Also worrying are some of the statements made by the Commission itself and some of its commissioners. In one instance, human rights commissioner, [Datuk] Lee Lam Thye made a statement suggesting that freedom of assembly will cause social riots and street violence. A statement made here by commissioner [Tan Sri Datuk Panglima] Simon Sipaun suggests that human rights in Malaysia were practically unknown before Suhakam's formation [last year]. Oh dear! I am lost for words!

Are these institutions to support human rights, or to support human rights violatiors? Human Rights Commissions or human rights omissions? Funding and liberty permitting, I may have a definite answer for you next year.

Thank you.

************************************************

Oral intervention at the UN Commission on Human Rights

Item 19: Advisory services and technical co-operation in the field of human rights

(Delivered by Deborah Stothard, April 20, 2001)

Owing to time constraints, content in [ ] will not be uttered

Mr/Madam Chairperson,

I speak on behalf of Aliran [Kesedaran Negara].

Last year, under this item, I called for the provision of refresher courses on human rights to some government delegations. This was to address the yawning gap between the human rights that some delegations speak of, the human rights violations their governments practice and human rights as is understood by the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights.

Last year, I also sought that technical and advisory services be provided to help governments overcome the Jekyll and Hyde syndrome which induces them to vociferously proclaim their human rights achievements while they perpetrate yet more violations at home. Just last week, as the Malaysian National Human Rights Commission was congratulating itself on its achievements here in this very room, the Kuala Lumpur home of Muslim legal expert Dr Badrul Amin Baharom was being surrounded by more than 20 police. Dr Badrul was taken from his home at 2 a.m. local time, [obviously at an hour that he was less likely to be in a militant mood]. He is now being detained without trial at a secret location under the Internal Security Act [a similar fate to that being suffered by the seven other ISA detainees. ]

[Dr Badrul Amin Baharom has a degree in Syariah Law from the Al-Azhar University in Egypt, studied comparative law at the University of Kent and obtained a doctorate in philosophy from Birmingham. He is a former law lecturer at the International Islamic University in Kuala Lumpur, is a well-known preacher and motivational speaker, and is Youth Exco member of the National Justice Party. It is anticipated that activist Abdul Malek Hussein and Justice Party Youth leader Lokman Noor Adam are also targets for detention without trial under the ISA. Abdul Malek Hussein was subjected to various forms of torture, including sexual abuse, when he was last detained under the ISA in 1998.]

The Jekyll and Hyde situation has not changed, so we are here again to report and discuss issues that may not be discussed at home. It is also tragic to note that many governments continue to be misguided by the precept that depriving people of their human rights is the best way to increase people s value for their rights.

Therefore, you can imagine my concern when I discovered another urgent need for technical assistance to help governments differentiate between reality and fantasy. I am not addressing the general tendency to diplomatic euphemism, or to embroider and/or stretch the truth. I am referring to situations where governments rip the truth to shreds, throw the pieces to the ground and then proceed to dance a jig upon the remains.

A compelling example is document E/CN.4/2001/140 in which the Myanmar delegation claims the country is free of human rights abuses. It claims such concrete achievements as the significant economic progress, and the social and cultural uplift and the improvement of the living standards of the people .

May I remind the Commission of the World Bank s findings that government spending on education [as a share of national income is amongst the lowest in the world], in real terms has fallen to less than a tenth of what it was ten years ago. [Official data shows that it has fallen from about 1,200 Kyat per child (5-9 years) in 1990-91 to 100 Kyat in 1999-2000. Source: Myanmar:

An Economic and Social Assessment World Bank 1999]. The Asian Development Bank has highlighted the disturbingly high rate of child mortality and the higher than average rate of infant mortality. [The ADB finds the declining expenditure on health and education particularly worrisome and notes that the benefits of economic growth do not seem to be well distributed with wide regional and ethnic differences Source: Asian Development Outlook 2000, Asian Development Bank 2000]. The SPDC s achievements include the following realities:

* Four per cent of men and 2 per cent of women in Burma are heroin abusers [compared with the global population average of 0.22%. Source: World Drug Report 2000, UNDCP 2001]

* UNAIDS figures estimate that 530,000 HIV infections occurred in the year 2000. The regime only admits 25,000 HIV-positive people.

* An estimated 2 million people have been displaced by military activities in recent years [Burma Ethnic Research Group]

* State parties have killed Hundreds of people in massacres and other extra-judicial killings.

* Hundreds of pro-democracy and human rights activists have been subjected to a revolving door system of detention, torture, release and re-arrest. There are also long-term prisoners, some of whom have been permanently disabled by the conditions of their detention, and some of whom have already served their sentences but not have been released.

* A significant number of the 35,959 primary schools claimed by the SPDC were actually

established and maintained by local communities, not public spending. [The only contribution of the regime has been to install its own notice board.]

The vivid imagination of the SPDC has no place in this Commission. Urgent technical assistance of various kinds is needed to help the Myanmar regime, and certain other governments in this Commission, understand what is acceptable as the truth and what is not. Otherwise, the threat of infection is great. It would be a global tragedy indeed, if the U N Commission on Human Rights were to become a hostage to fantasy and deceit.

Thank you.

**************************************

Good afternoon. My name is Naw Mu Si, and I am from Burma. Today, I would like to share with you the situation of armed conflict in my country and its negative affects on women.

Burma is a country that has been involved in an active internal armed struggle for the past fifty years. An earlier version of the current military regime took power in Burma during the middle of the last century, and Burma has been at war with itself ever since then. This internal armed conflict and a history of prejudice against women have led to a deadly situation for women caught in the wartime struggle. Many of them become unwilling and accidental participants in the armed conflict, not as soldiers, but as victims.

To understand the situation of violence against women in Burma, you must try to understand what it means to live in a highly militarized society. Since 1988, the ruling regime first known as the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), and later renamed the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), has controlled Burma with an inside circle of current and former generals and a military (the Tatmadaw) numbering between 400,000 and 500,000 soldiers. The most important social division in Burma is between members of the military and non-members. Women are always non-members, and never have access to the privileges such membership offers. In addition, because gender roles have been redefined to reflect the pervasive military culture, men are seen as the powerful fighters and protectors, and women as the weak and protected.

The military dominates every aspect of life in Burma—political, civil, social, economic, and even cultural. In this highly militarized society, the only official leaders are men. Under the current political system, the only way for a woman to have power in Burma is by "unofficial" means: by standing in opposition to the so-called State Peace and Development Council. As the leader of the democratic, civilian government that was elected in 1990 but barred by the regime from taking office since then, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is a living symbol of the potential of Burmese women. She also exemplifies the struggles and abuses that Burmese women endure.

The SPDC’s official position is that "women are accorded equal rights with men and there are no racial norms or practices in Burma that prevent the advancement of women." However, the political situation in Burma is so repressive and the armed conflict is so violent as to make the realization of most women’s potential impossible. In fact, the current regime’s well-documented failure to respect basic human rights has led to specific, troublesome human rights abuses against women. Such violations include state-sponsored rape and sexual assault, forced labor, prostitution and trafficking, forced relocation, and political oppression. The SPDC’s consistent use of military power and violence to maintain control results in widespread human rights abuses against all the people of Burma. However the women of Burma suffer double burdens—and, in the case of women from the ethnic minorities, triple—because of our race and gender.

Since 1988, first SLORC and then the SPDC have waged an ongoing war on armed opposition groups, many of which are associated with particular ethnic nationalities, that is, non-members of the Burman majority. As a part of these hostilities, sexual violence toward women in Burma occurs with alarming frequency. Much of the fighting occurs in border areas where ethnic nationalities traditionally have lived. As well, in these resource-rich locales, the SPDC has waged hostilities against some ethnic nationalities in the name of development. In particular, the SPDC has attacked villages and committed many human rights abuses as part of its forced relocation program necessary for the construction of various railways and pipelines. These projects are expected to generate money for the SPDC and its inner circle. From the perspective of those whose lands are confiscated, livelihoods are destroyed, and families are harmed, the projects are completely harmful.

The negative impact of these hostilities on women, and especially women from ethnic nationalities, is difficult to overstate. Woman are subjected to rape and other sexual assault in a variety of contexts: in their villages and fields; during flight; while they are serving as forced laborers or force porters; and under assorted pretexts in which soldiers abuse their authority and claim to be checking women’s documents. Women are raped by Burmese soldiers in their own homes, while they are internally displaced, and while they are on their way to seeking refuge in a third country.

One of the clearest examples of violence that women experience in Burma’s civil war is the practice of forced marriage. The practice of "Burmanisation," wherein Burmese soldiers seek to use rape as a tool of war against ethnic women in order to change the ethnic balance, demoralize ethnic minority communities, and kill ethnic women, has been documented. One of the ways the Burmese soldiers undertake this practice is by coercing women from non-Burman ethnicities to marry them. This is often achieved by forcing women to submit to unwanted physical contact or rape; the shame of such an experience often compels women to submit to marriage. Furthermore, either within these forced marriages, or as a consequence of rape, many women are impregnated against their will. The impact of these forced pregnancies is enormous: women are traumatized and stigmatized; they often suffer other grave physical injuries; sometimes they attempt to abort, often resulting in illness and death; and in an effort to obtain money for medicine or abortions, some women resort to desperate money-seeking measures such as prostitution.

The hostilities between the SPDC and many ethnic nationalities cause specific health problems for women resulting from the violence they experience. While it is impossible to calculate the number of women and girls who have been sexually assaulted and raped by Burmese soldiers in their villages and while in flight, anecdotal evidence suggests these figures are in the thousands, at the least. These women suffer multiple health problems resulting from the sexual violations, including HIV, other injuries, and trauma. Women and girls are often required to labor on infrastructure and military projects at the coercion of military troops without regard to their physical limitations. Numerous cases of forced labor during pregnancy have been documented, as well as incidents of rape committed by soldiers during forced labor.

In Shan, Karenni and Karen States, the SPDC continues the campaign of military operations, forced relocation and forced labor, and as a result about one million local inhabitants have become internally displaced persons (IDPs), most of whom are women and children. The situation of Internally Displaced People from Burma is a major concern, as they simply have nowhere to go. They cannot go back home as their villages and live stocks are destroyed and they can be shot if the army patrols find them in the areas known as "free fire zones". If they are found in the jungle, they will be shot and killed, so these people, men, women, children and elderly hide in the jungle and move from place to place. The IDPs have no access to medical care and to the basic needs such as food and shelter. Even if they find their way to the border safely, they are sometimes forced back into Burma by the Thai authorities. Some finally arrive to the refugee camps and find sanctuary.

Female internally displaced persons are especially vulnerable to violence. If they remain in their own villages, they are ripped from the protection of their communities and are lucky to survive chance encounters with soldiers in the jungle without suffering violence at their hands.

To examine violence against women in armed conflict areas, specifically in Burma, is to understand how big the problem is. It is as widespread and accepted as the military that perpetrates the violence within the country, and it creeps beyond the country’s borders to follow Burma’s refugees and migrants. It is both well known by the women who suffer this violence, and ignored by those in power. The armed conflict gives the military an excuse for the violence—if they admit it, they say it is just a natural part of war—but the armed conflict is not the deepest source. The cause of this violence is more likely a combination of prejudice against women, a widespread culture of militarization that celebrates violent masculine behavior, and huge power imbalances between men and women. The armed conflict in Burma gives the army an opportunity to act out these prejudices and power relationships. By resolving the armed conflict, the easy opportunity to commit the violence is eliminated, but the root causes still remain. These root causes—gender discrimination, militarization, power imbalances—must be addressed before women can enjoy the human security they deserve.

I thank you for your attention.

*******************************************

Good afternoon. My name is Naw Mu Si. I am from Burma and a member of the Karen people, which is the largest ethnic minority group in Burma. I am here today to talk to you about the problems of racial discrimination against refugees and migrant workers in Thailand. As a Karen woman, I am familiar with the racism and racial discrimination faced by Karen refugees in the countries where they seek refuge. I want to tell you about how women from ethnic minorities, and especially refugees and migrant women, are doubly and even triply discriminated against in many aspects of their lives. They experience sexual violence, powerlessness, and few educational, economic, and leadership opportunities. They are treated with disrespect and dislike in the best cases, and with cruelty and hatred in the worst. They are unwelcome guests in their host country, but they have nowhere else to go. Even the strongest of these women have no defenses against the prejudice they face and the hardships that result from that prejudice.

Racial discrimination against refugees and migrant workers is not a new problem in countries where they seek refuge. This problem afflicts people from countless countries. As you know, many of the conflicts raging in our world today are the result of ethnic divisions: in Kosovo; in Bosnia, Serbia, and Macedonia, in Indonesia; in Rwanda, Burundi, and Somalia; as well as in Burma, just to name a few. In these and other cases, people from ethnic minorities flee the violence and discrimination they experience in their homelands, only to find fresh sources of racism in their places of refuge. And of course, those of us who are women have the added burden of sexual discrimination to bear, on top of all of this.

You may know that, since its independence from Britain, my country has experienced difficult political struggles. Since 1988 Burma has been ruled by a military junta first called the SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council), and then renamed the State Peace and Development Council. We still call it the SLORC because the change was to the name only. There was no change in the repressive, undemocratic policies of the regime; no change to the fact that the military basically rules the country; and no change to the fact that this rule is through fear and violence rather than through democratic participation. I would argue that every single person from Burma has been affected negatively by this regime, but I would also claim that the ethnic minority groups, and the women in particular from those groups, have suffered very badly because we have been targeted for abuse. This abuse affects us both within our country and outside of it, when we leave to become refugees in third countries.

Burma is involved in an internal armed conflict, with no real end in sight. Because some of the ethnic minority groups have refused to put down their arms and "enter into the legal fold," as the regime describes it, these groups have been singled out for violence by the soldiers. The most obvious example of gender and ethnic discrimination against women is the widespread sexual violence. Karen women—many of whom I have met and spoken with—are raped by soldiers in their villages, on their way to their fields, as they are fleeing the army, and while they are forced to labor and porter for the military. In the border territories of Burma, where many ethnic minority groups live, soldiers have established a constant presence. They do this to control the ethnic populations, to make use of the natural resources in these areas, and to provide security for investment or construction projects. They view ethnic women as logical targets for their war against the ethnic minorities, and they use rape as a weapon, much like their guns and their mortar, to try to inflict damage on the enemy. Ethnic women pay the cost, through injury, illness, death, unwanted pregnancy, unsafe abortions, trauma, mental anguish, and social isolation.

Especially for those of us who were able to escape the dangers of life in Burma as ethnic minorities, we are well aware of the Burmese army’s campaign of "Burmanization." This means that Burmese soldiers make special efforts to abuse ethnic minority women. They do this for several reasons: to strike terror into the very heart of the ethnic minority communities; to force ethnic minority women into pregnancies resulting from rape by men who are members of the ethnic majority; and to prevent ethnic women from bearing more ethnic minority children. Strangely enough, according to this theory of Burmanization, the ethnicity of the father—the rapist—is the only one that seems to be relevant in determining the ethnicity of the child. So, even though an ethnic minority woman is raped, her child bears the ethnicity of the father, in her eyes as well as the eyes of the rapist. By spreading this idea—that children of rape are their fathers’ children first—the rapists commit double violence. They commit the violence against the woman, and they commit the violence against the entire ethnic minority community. In my country, only ethnic minority women can suffer this particular kind of violence. Their ethnicity, which is ordinarily such a source of pride, combines with their gender, to create this double oppression.

We have no way of knowing how many women experience this type of double discrimination. We know that many ethnic minority women from the border regions of Burma—the borders with Thailand and Bangladesh, in particular—experience it. I have talked to or learned about Karen women, Karenni women, Shan women, Mon women, Rohingya women, and others, who have experienced it. It is impossible to assemble statistics for many reasons: women are reluctant to tell anyone if they have been raped; some of these women are dead; many of these women live in remote areas; and those of us who are documenting the abuses cannot safely go into Burma to find out how often this happens.

*** I recently read an article in the Thai newspaper, the Bangkok Post, which gave me hope. Thai academics held a seminar in which they expressed their concern about the excessive level of prejudice school-age children in Thailand hold for their Burmese neighbors. They warned about the continued consequences of the "deep-rooted reproduction of hatred and ignorance" encouraged by the government against people from Burma. They predicted that people in the region would never learn to live together peacefully until Thais confronted their racial and ethnic prejudices, and began to try to understand the various cultures and peoples from Burma.

I was hopeful after reading this article because I have seen so few public acknowledgements of this horrible prejudice. I have, on the other hand, seen many of the consequences of this prejudice. I have talked to migrant workers who have told me terrible stories about being arrested, then beaten while in detention because they could not afford to pay the bribe to get themselves released. I have heard about the dreadful conditions experienced by Burmese factory workers in Thailand—their pay is one-half the amount that Thai workers get; their homes are made of cardboard huts in open fields; they sleep on the ground. I have learned about the discrimination sex workers from Burma face in Thailand. Women who have been trafficked into prostitution are beaten by their customers but can make no complaint. If their brothel is raided, they are taken to a detention center, where they are raped by police and then repatriated back to Burma.

These are the secret and hidden consequences of prejudice against the Burmese refugees and migrants, unseen by most. A public acknowledgement of prejudice, such as the one I saw in the Bangkok Post article, was a hopeful sign to refugees and migrants from Burma because such publicity is necessary in order to end the prejudice. However, it is just the beginning. The Thai government, and all host governments, must acknowledge and fight against the prejudices so many people hold against ethic minorities. If the Thai government actually takes up this struggle, it will help the people a great deal. However, it will only correct part of the problem. The Burmese regime also must acknowledge the problem of racial and ethnic prejudice within the country. Racism is like a disease. It creeps across borders and travels back and forth freely. It must be addressed wherever it exists, and it must be treated like the public health hazard that it is. And it must be recognized as a particularly deadly force when it is combined with sexual discrimination.

I look to the future knowing that I face many obstacles because of my combined heritage of gender, ethnicity, and social class. While I hope some day to return to Burma and continue to work there for my people, I know that it will not be easy. If and when democracy comes to Burma, we will have a long legacy of ethnic, religious, and sexual oppression to overcome. Many of us, women from ethnic minorities, will be traumatized from rape and other abuse. Many of us will be lost to the trafficking industry. Many of us will have received even less education than our brothers. Many of us will be less ready to assume jobs of authority in our new government since a few women have been allowed leadership positions in our democracy movement. And on top of this, we will face a history of sexism and racism that has plagued Burma for centuries.

In spite of this heavy burden, I am hopeful. I believe the first step in relieving us of our heavy burden of gender, racial, ethnic, religious, and class discrimination has been taken, at least at the international level. If, together, we recognize that the intersection of these oppressive forces creates special hardships, we can work together to craft special solutions.

Thank you for your attention.